O-10, I’m sorry, but you really don’t understand; worse, you don’t want to understand. I have no issue whatsoever with you needing to feel that you are correct; the shame is that you don’t understand why it’s not a question of which is better. Again, please go over what I have written and note that I have not, at any point, said that I would "place Trane over Bird". That is just the simplistic place where you always want to take the issue: "who was better". The question was and remains whether (according to you) Bird could have played everything that Trane played. The answer is a resounding NO. The fact that Bird came before and heavily influenced Trane (and every other modern player) does, in no way, preclude the fact that Trane took improvisation to a place that Bird never did. Again, the nature of the art form. That does not make Trane "better". To understand this idea is to understand jazz. Personally, I wouldn’t worry so much about the "aficionado" designation; so, feel free to take that title away from me if it makes you feel better.
(Funny, when I read that word in the context of music as earthy and soulful as jazz, it always evokes an image of Hugh Heffner with a pipe in his mouth and some scantily clad bunny lurking in the background 😘).
